Globalist Campaign Calls for Abolishment ofConstitution

Globalist Campaign Calls for Abolishment of Constitution Kurt Nimmo and Alex Jones Infowars.com February 8, 2012 The global elite will not rest until they have revoked the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. Over the last few years, they have engaged in a concerted attack on our founding documents and time-honored ideals. On Tuesday, the New York Times continued this trend with an article on the front page of its print edition.

Entitled ‘We the People’ Lose Appeal With People Around the World, the article by 1. Adam Liptak argues that the Constitution is outdated, inflexible and no longer trendy. It cites an article published in June in The New York University Law Review that explains how America’s Constitution is “losing its appeal as a model for constitutional drafters elsewhere” as statists, bureaucrats and autocrats turn to examples presented by more malleable documents such as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and those produced by India, South Africa, New Zealand and the United Nations.

The problem, Liptak notes, is that “rights guaranteed by the American Constitution are parsimonious by international standards, and they are frozen in amber.” In other words, the “problem” with the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence is that the rights enumerated there are not open for interpretation and cannot be changed by government.

But what really irks the elite is the idea that government only exists by the consent of the governed and “whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends [of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness], it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,” as the Declaration of Independence states. In other words, it is the right of the people to revolt against government – preferably through

peaceful means, but by violent revolution if need be, as Thomas Jefferson argued – when it becomes an oppressive tyranny, as it now is.

The very idea that the people have the right to abolish government scares the hell out of the ruling elite. The Second Amendment is under persistent attack not because guns are a danger to school children, but because guns and people well trained in their proper use are often required to resist and overthrow government tyranny. Control freaks never surrender power willingly.

The establishment is now openly assaulting the Constitution and the very idea of innate and godgiven individual rights going back to the Magna Carta, the Habeas Corpus Act, the Petition of Right and English common law. The Constitution and the Declaration of Independence encapsulate and enumerate into law liberties that are the birthright of humanity. Government is not required to bestow them as the New York Times would have use believe. We are born with them despite trendiness or the dictates of commissars at the United Nations.

Obama has continued unabated the concerted attack on the Constitution initiated under his predecessors. Efforts to undermine the Constitution began in earnest with FDR, although earlier presidents – most notably Lincoln – set important precedents.

Obama’s task is to undermine due process and the separation of powers. From the 1. NDAA to Obamacare and violating the will of Congress and the American people through signing statements and waging illegal wars without declaration or congressional consultation, Obama has amplified and expanded what George Bush and Bill Clinton before him began.

Obama’s letter to Congress claiming U.S. military power used with devastating result against the people of Libya was “legitimized” by the United Nations Security Council represents a watershed moment in the effort to trample the Constitution and transfer authority from the people to autocratic globalists. It is a modern version of the “long train of abuses and usurpations” mentioned by the founders in the Declaration of Independence.

It is up to the American people to prevent the destruction of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It probably cannot be accomplished from within the system. Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Obama – these are the corrupted minions of globalists who fear the Rights of Man the same as vampires fear sunlight. They will further the destruction of liberty, not impede it and stop the solemn march to slavery and ultimately the destruction of civilization.

Ron Paul represented the best chance to restore the Constitution and rebuild our republic. He was plowed under by the establishment and its corporate media propaganda machine. Patriotic Americans must continue at all cost to oppose the efforts of the elite as they work to methodically turn the planet into a slave labor gulag with a high-tech police state control grid overlay. The effort must transcend any particular political candidate and live in the hearts of men and women as they resist tyranny.

Obama runs roughshod over religious freedom Kathleen Parker 1. Washington Post February 8, 2012 Most Americans can hardly believe we’re having a national debate about birth control in the 21st century — more than 50 years after the Pill became available and decades after condoms became as commonplace as, well, balloons.

The reason for the incredulity is because we’re actually not having a debate about birth control. To repeat: The debate is about freedom of conscience. It ain’t about the Pill.

This particular episode is significant because the Obama administration has provided the narrowest conscience protection in our nation’s history, according to legal experts who are challenging the administration’s rule. We have a long tradition in this country of working around religious differences so that people are not forced to violate their faith to satisfy a secular mandate. This is the 1. essence of the debate.

To women who merely want help paying for birth control, this may seem an obnoxiously silly discussion. Noted. But the larger issue is worth paying attention to even at personal inconvenience. That inconvenience, by the way, needn’t be permanent. The immediate problem of providing birth control to those who can’t afford it can be massaged — for instance, the government can hand out contraceptives to the poor, as is already the case in some states. But the issue of religious liberty is one of those foundational principles that isn’t really up for revision.

As to the separation of church and state argument that church critics keep raising, keep in mind that this separation was also intended to protect religious believers from state interference. When the state insists that one’s religious beliefs be supplanted by another’s, in this case by secularism, then might one

argue that the state is establishing a religion in contravention of the Constitution’s intent?

The new health-care reform act’s mandate that Catholic institutions pay for insurance to cover birth control and even abortifacient drugs (a.k.a. “morning-after” pills) runs deeply contrary to fundamental Catholic teaching. The argument that many Catholic women ignore this particular church commandment is a non sequitur. The church has consistently stood by this teaching.

Catholics commit adultery and lie, too, but they don’t want or expect the church to condone those actions.

Although Catholic churches and their direct employees are exempt from the new rule, all those other Catholic-sponsored entities, from schools to hospitals to charities that employ nonCatholics, have to comply or pay prohibitive fines. Estimates are that Notre Dame University, which hosted President Obama as commencement speaker in 2009 against howls of protest, would have to pay $10 million in annual fines. That’s some expensive birth control, baby.

And we’re talking billions of dollars’ worth of lost services to the poor if Catholic charities shut down, as well as educational chaos, especially in inner cities where Catholic schools often provide the only stability in poor children’s lives.

Whatever the odds are that the church may change its position on contraception someday, it won’t be soon. For now the bishops are promising a fight to the end. It’s that important to them, a fact of which Obama was well aware. Catholic leaders are justified in their outrage, especially those who helped Obama with health-care reform and now feel betrayed.

Exhibit A: Sister Carol Keehan, CEO of the Catholic Health Association, who supported the health-care act with assurances from Obama that Catholics’ rights of conscience would be protected, despite criticism from many other Catholic leaders. She has now met the crowded underside of Obama’s bus.

Exhibit B: Archbishop Timothy Dolan, who had a private meeting with Obama in November, after which he said he was hopeful about the final rule. Headlines to that effect unleashed Planned Parenthood’s public relations whirlwind, prompting blog headlines such as “Will Obama cave to Catholic bishops?” Apparently not.

Obama’s calculation must have been that there are more women who want insurance coverage for birth control than there are obedient Catholics. Although Obama won with 54 percent of the Catholic vote last time, he may have miscalculated. Women are not a monolithic vote, and even though some Catholic women may disagree with the church, they still love and respect it and how it serves the poor. They may like Obama, birth control and Democrats, but they don’t want to see their church beaten up.

These are tough, emotional issues, to be sure. But consider that we allow even Nazis to march because we believe so fervently in freedom of expression. We should believe at least as strongly in freedom of conscience, not only for Catholics’ sake but also for our own.

White House, US Courts and EPA shaft Veterans to protect Monsanto Cassandra Anderson 1. Natural Society February 8, 2012 American veterans and the entire country of Viet Nam affected by Agent Orange have been shafted beyond imagination due to corruption within the US government and US courts. US courts have protected Monsanto and Dow Chemical from liability and criminal prosecution. The US government has shielded Monsanto and Dow from the massive cost of medical treatment for victims and environmental remediation cleanup costs that would drive these corporations into bankruptcy.

Before we delve further into the issue, it’s important to detail what exactly dioxin is. Dioxin has a half life of 100 years or more when it is below the surface, leached into soil or embedded in river or stream sediment. Dioxin was generated as a byproduct of herbicide 2,4,5-T made by Monsanto and Dow, the top 2 producers of Agent Orange. It causes cancer, birth defects, liver damage and other major health problems.

Monsanto & Dow’s 2,4,5-T dioxin laden-herbicide was used in the US for agricultural purposes in the 1940's before it was used for chemical warfare in Viet Nam from the early 1960's through 1971. It was phased out in the late 1970's. Now, let’s discuss the political situation behind this carcinogen.

US Government and US Court Dioxin CoverUps President Reagans’s administration, in cahoots with the CDC, thwarted a $43 million Congressional Study of Agent Orange in 1987 to protect itself and its corporate pals Monsanto & Dow from accountability to US veterans and the people of Viet Nam. US Courts dismissed veterans’ Agent Orange lawsuits based on a Supreme Court precedent, known as the Feres Doctrine, freeing the government of responsibility for deaths and

injuries related to military service.The Supreme Court refused to hear American and Vietnamese victims’ lawsuits against Monsanto, Dow and other Agent Orange manufacturers on 3 separate occasions. Remember that the Supreme Court collects their checks from the federal government.

Atrocious Criminal Acts By Monsanto & Dow Agent Orange makers hide behind government contractor immunity, despite the fact that dioxin contaminated herbicide 2,4,5-T was produced long before they were contractors for the government (50 million tons of the herbicide was sprayed in the USper year). No modifications were used for Monsanto & Dow’s herbicide — half the ingredients in Agent Orange — so the immunity defense falls flat.

- Boehringer, a German 2,4,5-T herbicide producer notified Dow in 1957 about dioxin hazards and that dioxin could be eliminated by slow cooking the herbicide for about 12 hours. It appears that Dow and Monsanto continued cooking 2,4,5-T quickly in 45 minutes. Higher output led to higher profits. Monsanto’s formula contained high levels of dioxin and was dirtier than Dow’s product.

- Monsanto was not only aware in 1950 that dioxin was a health danger, but they also created a fraudulent health study.

- In 1965 Dow met in secret with other Agent Orange manufacturers to discuss the toxicity hazards of dioxin and their fear over a government investigation and restrictive regulations.

US Veterans Shafted By the Kangaroo Court Judge Jack Weinstein of the US Federal Court of the Eastern District of New York committed the following offenses in several class action suits filed by veterans against Monsanto & Dow: - Weinstein appointed attorneys to represent the veterans and then intimidated the attorneys into agreeing to a ‘nuisance’ settlement of $180 millionnowhere near enough money to cover the medical treatment of hundreds of thousands of injured vets.

- Weinstein rejected the veterans’ expert studies, instead of allowing a jury to decide on the credibility of the expert witnesses; Weinstein created a new rule of law from the bench.

- Weinstein based his ruling on Monsanto’s expert study that was later proven to be fraudulent.

- Weinstein dismissed all other veterans’ lawsuits against Monsanto and Dow.

- Weinstein took over a case that was unlawfully transferred to his federal court as it had been filed in the state of Texas. He dismissed that case.

- Astonishingly, Weistein created a second new rule of law to protect Monsanto and Dow. Weinstein invented immunity for government contractors!

Weinstein’s excuse for the government contractor defense was that if contractors were made to pay, they would pass the cost on to the government, so they were therefore immune. Weinstein’s new law was created from the bench instead of law passed through Congress!

Weinsteins’s law has now been extended to all government supply contractors (even non-military contractors) in the courts.

Viet Nam Approximately 11 million gallons of Agent Orange was dumped on Viet Nam between 1962 to 1970. It is estimated that Agent Orange is responsible for 400,000 deaths, 3 million victims of disease and 500,000 children born with birth defects.

Over 14 million acres of Vietnamese forests were sprayed. Agent Orange was also dumped in water supplies.

In 2004, Vietnamese victims filed a lawsuit against Dow, Monsanto and other manufacturers of Agent Orange. Judge Weinstein (yes, the same Judge Weinstein) presided over this case and dismissed it. Weinstein used the excuse that Monsanto and Dow had government sovereign immunity that extended to them because they were government contractors. He also ruled that Agent Orange was not considered a poison during that period, under international law.

The Supreme Court refused to hear this case, too.

The stated purpose of using Agent Orange was to deny the enemy cover in forested areas through defoliation. However, the US Army did contract studies in 1943 of the effects of 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D (the other ingredient of Agent Orange) on cereal grains, including rice, and developed the

concept of using aerial herbicide spraying to destroy enemy crops to disrupt the food supply. Obviously, poisoning the enemy, farmland and civilians was a chemical warfare strategy used by the US government.

Monsanto Immunity Currently, there is a court case pending against Monsanto’s dioxin contaminated 2,4,5-T herbicide filed by parties who lived near the plant where it was produced in West Virginia. The judge in that case, Paul G. Gardephe, denied Monsanto immunity! Judge Gardephe asserted that because Monsanto burned dioxin waste in open pits and the US government was not aware of this practice, nor did they evaluate it for hazard, Monsanto’s contractor defense was denied.

Fate of US Veterans In 2003, the Supreme Court affirmed a lower court decision allowing veterans to sue Monsanto, Dow and other Agent Orange manufacturers directly.

The government has responded, under the Obama regime, by passing the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010, which allows the automatic funding of veterans’ Agent Orange claims. While Monsanto & Dow appear to have considerable liability, the cost of healthcare and hospitalization of affected veterans is paid by American taxpayers.

More than 2 million Americans served in Viet Nam. The Veterans Administration claims they have no idea how many vets have been treated for Agent Orange injuries, or how much taxpayer money has been spent. The EPA is also involved in the cover-up and has been delaying an assessment report on dioxin since 1985 to protect plastic, chlorine, paper, herbicide and agricultural industries.